[sc34wg3] www.topicmaps.com (and topicmaps.org)

[Robert Barta]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 11:57:56AM -0700, Jack Park wrote:
> The heading "What XTM is" would have gone a long way to clarify issues
> you raise. "XTM is not topic maps" goes not even an inch in a positive
> direction; if anything, it steps backwards. Murray apparently saw
> that. So did I.

But I couldn't. :-)

In fact, I was very happy to see this written down.  I still find too
many people (even those in the W3C/ISO/... stratosphere) bitten by
this misunderstanding. Giving industry tutorials can be a real
eye-opener.

[ The good message here is, that the RDF-people struggle with the same
phenomenon. ]

I cannot see how saying this should lessen the efforts undertaken by
the original 'founding fathers' (no I will not use this term in public
:-), ah maybe). We all go weird convoluted paths until we reach
enlightenment (or death, whatever comes first).

BTW, for a CS person it is absurdly bizarre to start with a syntax and
define a model afterwards. But in the case of TMs, it worked out in
the end (thanks to enormous efforts from certain individuals, of
course).

\rho